Make a Difference

Salt Lake City Police Department employee Dianna Goodliffe has been in a
committed and loving relationship with her partner Lisa for almost six
years. The couple has a four-year-old daughter who suffers from diabetes,
making health insurance a particularly important consideration. Like all
parents, Goodliffe and her partner want to do what’s best for their family,
which, in the future, may include Lisa working part-time or staying at home to
care for their daughter. However, this option is accessible only if Goodliffe
can enroll Lisa in the city benefits program.

In September of 2005, Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson issued an executive
order that extends health and other employment benefits to Salt Lake City
employees’ same-sex and unmarried heterosexual domestic partners. Shortly
after that, the governing body of the agency that administers health insurance
for state and local government employees filed a petition in state court asking
for clarification about whether the benefits are legal. It did so after
being contacted by a state legislator who contends that the benefits would be
illegal under the terms of Utah’s constitutional amendment that bans marriage
for same-sex couples.

The ACLU of Utah, the national ACLU, and the local branch of the American
Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) have filed a
friend-of-the-court brief in the case on Goodliffe’s behalf, arguing that there
is nothing in Utah’s statutory or constitutional law that prohibits Salt Lake
City from offering domestic partner benefits, and that there are strong public
policy arguments in favor of making such benefits available.

The full case name is In the Matter of the Utah State Retirement Board’s
Trustee Duties and Salt Lake City Executive Order Dated September 21, 2005.